Rhetorical Analysis On Civil Disobedience

As an individual, Henry David Thoreau prioritized his own conscience over the beliefs of others. He believed that majority rule was an ineffective form of governing since the majority was not always correct, and he believed man comes before government. In hopes of persuading others to see the faults in majority rule, he discussed it in his writing called Civil Disobedience.

Thoreau was a rebel and proposed the idea of civil disobedience as one of his tactics to ensure that everyone only supported what they believed was right. His rebellious tendencies were destined to make him oppose any form of government in which each individual voice was not represented. Due to his belief that the majority was not always correct since only certain opinions were accounted for, Thoreau believed their power had come from another source, their large numbers. He wrote, After all, the practical reason why, when the power is once in the hands of the people, a majority are permitted, and for a long period continue, to rule is not because they are most likely to be in the right, nor because this seems fairest to the minority, but because they are physically the strongest. The dismissal of so many opinions and beliefs in

the decisions made by the majority caused the majority rule to be an ineffective practice in the eyes of Thoreau. He believed that every individual has a conscience and because of this, they should all be used when making decisions, not ignored in favor of the beliefs of the legislation.
Thoreau heavily discussed following one’s conscience as a moral compass rather than blindly giving one’s mind to over to the legislation. He wrote, Can there not be a government in which majorities do not virtually decide right and wrong, but conscience?- in which majorities decide only those questions to which the rule of expediency is applicable? Must the citizen ever for a moment, or in the least degree, resign his conscience to the legislation? Why has every man a conscience, then? I think that we should be men first, and subjects afterward. If a man has a conscience, then it is meant to be used not ignored. Thoreau believed that the government and majorities did not have to be prioritized over an individual’s conscience, instead, he dreamt of a government in which majorities only made decisions of expediency. So, rather than putting one’s conscience to the wayside, Thoreau instead wanted to make conscience a priority over the government.
Throughout his writing, Thoreau also mentioned people's responsibility to act on their beliefs.

He wrote, A wise man will not leave the right to the mercy of chance, nor wish it to prevail through the power of the majority. There is but little virtue in the action of masses of men. Thoreau’s statement asserted that if you believe something is right, it is your own responsibility to see that action carried out. By allowing your beliefs to be put into action through the mass majority you are not likely to see them done since large groups of people tend to lack high moral standards. Therefore, Thoreau approved of following your own conscience and acting upon what you believe is right, rather than leaving the actions up to the chance that the mass majority will side with

you.
On the topic of majority rule, Thoreau did not agree with it and sided more so with civil disobedience and following your own conscience. While practicing majority rule Thoreau felt as though not everyone’s beliefs were heard and the conscience of many individuals was sitting idle. He also believed that by joining the majority, people were allowing the government to take priority over their own duties as human beings. When deciding on a proper way to govern the United States a rebellious Thoreau would not side with majority rule, he would much rather side with a government focused on individuals. In the government Thoreau finds ideal, people listen to their own conscience and act upon their own beliefs, not the popular desire and majority rule is only used in matters dealing with expediency.